An Indian Christian features my occasional and idiosyncratic views of religion, politics, culture and tradition. It is specialized in understanding God and humanity from an Indian Christian perspective, It promotes on New Humanity through the principles of the Athma - Jesus

This is a blog about my living a journey within the context of being an Indian Christian. I blog about various topics from issues that affect the Church today to current political and cultural trends and even poetry.

Monday, July 8, 2013

Conversion
in Islam is more complicated than any other religions comparatively. Conversion
is universally understood as a person who changes his world views, religion,
and allegiance.[1]
Therefore, there is a need realize few theological aspects of conversion. Should a Muslim
need to adopt Christianity/Churchianity to have eternal life? Not at all.
Salvation is based on God’s grace; it cannot be earned by rituals or work.

Theologically,
and from the perspectives of institutional churches, no one can be regarded as
Christian if he is not part of visible church. On the other hand, John
Ridgway describes that “Jesus
encouraged others to be insiders.”[2] And Jesus also mentioned that He has many
sheep which is not in this folk.

In
addition, practically Muslim insider/converts cannot access Bible,
Christian Scripture, and sacraments such as Baptism and Eucharist. The
prevailing attitude of Islam does not tolerate these kinds of other religious
observations. Does every person need Mosaic revelation, Bible to get salvation.
I don’t think so. A Muslim can be touched by the work of Holy Spirit from Kuran
and even from hearing Mullah in Mosque. Because, the redemptive work of Jesus
Christ through the Holy Spirit does not bind with the channel of Christian
religion.

Insider movements cannot be or will not be accepted by traditional
churches as it lacks lots of religious principles of Christian religion.
However, it facilitates thousands of insiders to be faithful follower of Christ
not the Christian religion.

Missiological implications

In accordance with Muslim insider, any category of religious conversion
means potentially much nuisance in Islamic society since Islam is a
socio-religious community. In some context, conversion causes death penalty. Sociologically C5 offers room for
keeping the social relations of an insider and transforming them.[3]

Islam is more of Theo-centric religion. By being
an insider, there is a probability to preach about Islamic Christ[4] not Christian Christ. In
addition, being followers of Esua and by calling themselves as Muslim.[5] An insider, they can
utilize “Kuran” to communicate Christ to Muslims. Kuran and Injil
are exceedingly regarded in Islamic society. Subsequently, as an alternative of
presenting Christ from the Bible, Kuran and Injil have to be used as bridges to
present the comprehensible notion about Christ. These things would be of
assistance for the missionaries to categorize the God-fearers in the Muslim
community.

But is it hypocrisy? It
cannot be considered so. It can be considered only as hypocrisy if Christ is
not presented in Islamic Scripture. Following Christ in Islam is absolutely
possible as Christ is considered as one of the Prophets of Islam and a person
who was sent by God to give salvation and will be returning on the day of
Judgement.

Muslim men do not entail baptism as he had already gone through the Old
Testament circumcision. Baptism means cleansing and it signifies a witnessing
act? Witnessing does not mean of changing religious identity, conversely it is
about following the principles of Christ. Moreover, it is witnessing through
life-style. According to Rebecca Lewis, and this kind of new spirituality adds
insider into the Kingdom of God and disciples of Jesus Christ.[6]

Practical
Application

The word ‘Christian’ carries
connotations which are offensive in Islamic context and would in reality
obscure their identity as a follower of Jesus. And more over, Islamic community is more community oriented, and
their community and religion are always intertwined. For that reason, if any
one wants to follow Esha nabi, he/she[7]
should stay with the family. Essentially, they don’t obligate to expose
themselves as Christian for the sake of political religious and social
scenario.

Muslim may maintain the old
practices since some of them do not conflict with biblical truth, and may
reject some old practices because they may directly conflicts with biblical
truth, or they may modify the old practices to infuse it with Christian
meaning.

Furthermore, one can follow Christ in Islam without breaking his
socio-religious identity. Including following all the five pillars of Islam.
Can it be a theological struggle? There are may be problem with two of the five
pillars which requires them to accept Mohammad as final prophet and requires
Haj pilgrimage.

An Muslim has more opportunity to know Christ without having any outside
source, making it more clear, the revelation of Kuran should be considered
value one to understand Christ.

One can follow Christ in Islam without breaking his socio-religious
identity. Including following all the five pillars of Islam. Can it be a
theological struggle? There are may be problem with 2 of the pillars which
requires them to accept Mohammad as final prophet and requires Haj pilgrimage. Nevertheless, a
follower of Christ cannot affirm that all that is commonly taught about the
Quran and Muhammad. Therefore certain aspect of the role of Muhammad and the
Quran must be reinterpreted. Ex: denial of crucifixion of Christ. However,
converted Muslim should follow all the practice and traditions of the Islam as
a respect of their family and community. Thus a Muslim can remain Muslim, yet
live as true follower of the Jesus, Isa Almasih

As a result, C5 believers can remain legally and socially
within the community of Islam.

Sanchez, Daniel R.
“Contextualization and the Missionary Endeavor.” In Missiology: An
Introduction to the Foundations, History, and Strategy of World Missions,
edited by John Mark Terry, Ebbie Smith, and Justice Anderson. Nashville, New York:
Broadman and Holman, 1998.

Tiwari, Ravi. “Theology of A
Convert.” In Yisu Das: Witness of A Convert, edited by Ravi Tiwari.
Delhi: ISPCK, 2000.

Friday, July 5, 2013

To all my American friends and family membersHappy Independence Day to you all.While many Americans will spend this holiday with family and friends enjoying summer weather, fireworks, and outdoor barbeques, thousands of people in other parts of the world are fighting for freedom. Today, in particular, we, the people of the world, pay tribute to those of our friends in all parts of the world for their strength, their courage, their willingness and their LOVE.

It is a time for every single people in the world to recognize that the blessings of freedom are not free. They come from courage, open minding and loving each other regardless of any nationalities and religions. We need to build a bridge between all people and this is now our responsibility to fulfill - so that our children can enjoy a better life.

Wednesday, July 3, 2013

This
paper aims to deal with the historical puzzle as to who were the recipients of
Paul’s letter to the Galatians. Raymond E. Brown notes that this debate has be
deliberated upon for nearly two centuries by various scholars.1 As
James D.G. Dunn comments, the difficulty in dealing with this issue arises out
of the confusion with the names “Galatia” or “Galatians” for it can be used ethnically, referring to the descendants of the Gallic tribes and administratively,
referring to the Roman province.2 However, Dunn notes that the issue
largely revolves around the relation
between Acts and Galatians, whether Paul could be referring to the churches
established during the first missionary journey (Acts 13-14).3

Historical Background

Before getting into
the main argument, it would be worthwhile to locate the audience in their
historical context. Raymond E. Brown notes that

Galatai
were Indo-Aryans, related to the Celts and Gauls, who invaded Asia Minor about
279 B.C. Within fifty years, after defeat by the kingdom of Pergamum, their
territory was restricted to a mountainous central section around Ancyra (modern
Ankara). Rome used them as allies in various wars; and when the last Galatian
king died in 25 B.C., their ethnic homeland was incorporated into the large
Roman “Province of Galatia” that extended south toward the Mediterranean,
including Pisidian Antioch, Iconium, Lystra, and Derbe.4

Geographically
speaking, Dunn shows us that the above mentioned towns (i.e. Pisidian Antioch,
Iconium, Lystra and Derbe) were situated south of ethnic Galatia, but had been
included in the
Roman province as its southernmost part.5 However, Brown argues that
Luke never refers to the
southern region as “Galatia” and that the southern cities Antioch, Derbe,
Iconium and Lystra
(Acts 13:14; 14:6) are not placed in the Roman “province” but in their
“districts”6 Moreover,
Walter Hansen notes that by the third century A.D., the province of Galatia was
reduced to
approximately its ancient ethnological dimensions, the original “northern”
territory of the Celtic

invaders.7 Hansen also mentions that this “northern”
part was the only Galatia that existed during

the
patristic times.8 Hansen further notes that “Galatia” in Paul’s
time, referred to the entire

Roman province
covering Pontus in the north to Pamphylia in the South. Hansen says that
inspite of their ethnic origin; all the residents of this province were called
“Galatians.”9

Recipients: Northern Galatians

Having
briefly seen the historicity of the problem, let us now discuss the main issue.
In this

section
we will look at the evidences for a northern Galatia. Dunn shows us that in
Acts 16:6 and
18:23 Paul makes a passing reference to “Galatia and Phrygia.”10
Dunn notes that according to
Luke’s record of Paul’s missionary visit in Acts 16:6 the two cities “Galatia
and Phrygia” are
different from the cities mentioned in Acts 14:1-5 (Derbe, Lystra).11
Hence Dunn argues that, for
Luke “Galatia” could be referring to the ethnic Galatians in the north which
does not correlate to
his first missionary visit but rather to Paul’s initial mission work according
to Acts 16:6.12

Moreover,
Brown notes that the term “Galatia” in Paul’s address (Gal. 3:1) though maybe

confusing
is more appropriate for the “ethnic Galatians” in the north than for the
“Hellenized

Galatians” in the
south.13 Hansen also notes that scholars such as J. B. Lightfoot and
H. D. Betz
have argued for a northern position based on the grounds that the recipients
were churches in or
near Ancyra, Pessinus and Tavium, three cities in northern Asia Minor (modern
Turkey).14

Hansen
notes that pro-northern scholars have understood this territory to be
originally conquered
and settled by a distinct “ethnic” group of Celtic (Gaulish) descent in the
third century B.C.
Therefore they hold the view that in Gal. 3:1, Acts 16:6 and 18:23 Paul is
referring to this
“particular race” that belongs to north Galatia.15 However, to take
a pro-northern view is still
confusing in the light of Hansen’s comment that inspite of their ethnic origin,
all the residents of the Roman province covering Pontus in the north to Pamphylia in
the South were called

Galatians.

Recipients: Southern Galatians

On
the other hand, other scholars have equally noted evidences for a southern
position. D.A.

Carson,
Douglas J. Moo and Leon Morris have closely observed why the southerners of
various races included in the Roman province are considered to be the audience.
Firstly, Carson, Moo and Morris note that some scholars believe that Paul’s
ministry was more in the southern region than in the north. Moreover, the few
instances that refer to his northern presence do not mention any church
planting done by Paul (Acts 16:6; 8:23).16

Secondly,
Carson, Moo and Morris show us that while Paul’s reference to “the region of
Phrygia and Galatia” mentioned in Acts 16:6 is taken by the northern contenders
to mean “Phrygia and
the Galatian country” inversely, scholars such as F.F. Bruce have suggested
that “the region of
Phrygia and Galatia” was merely an exit route that Paul took whenever he left
Lystra and
Iconium (Acts 16:2; 18:23) and thus is properly “Phrygio-Galatic territory.”17
However, Carson, Moo and Morris note that northern contenders still argue that
Luke tends to speak of places in geographic terms such as “Pisidian” Antioch (Acts 13:14) thereby
suggesting that “the region of Phrygia and Galatia” must literally be taken as
“geographic Phrygia” and “geographic Galatia”
as two different places.18 But, Carson, Moo and Morris conclude by
saying that such a distinction is unlikely and thus pointing to a southern
Galatia.19

Brown
on the other hand contends that Acts 16:6-7 points more towards the northern
Galatia.
Brown argues that the expression “the region of Phrygia and Galatia” could
either mean that
Paul, Silas and Timothy during their second missionary journey “moved westward
through the
Phrygian region of the province of Galatia (thus still not north Galatia), or
moved northward
through Phrygia into the North Galatian territory proper? Brown argues that
“geographically”

although the case for a southern Galatia seems more plausible the
evidence still compels to a

northern
position.20

Thirdly,
Carson, Moo and Morris points to Paul’s territorial usage of titles such as
“Galatians”

which
is usually used to refer to the Roman provinces of Lycaonia, Antioch, Lystra,
Iconium and Derbe. However, Carson, Moo and Morris show that there are other
who argue against this
position, have noted that Paul’s usage is subject to change and therefore there
is also a
probability that “Galatians” could still include the ethnic Galatians in the
north.21

Fourthly,
Carson, Moo and Morris identify the mention of two individuals who contributed

towards
the offerings for the Jerusalem believers (Acts 20:4; 1 Cor. 16:1). Among the
others who
contributed from Berea and Thessalonica, scholars say that the two contributors
from Galatia
could be “South Galatians” although this information is not directly derived
from Luke’s
record.22

Fifthly,
Carson, Moo and Morris note that it is unlikely that Paul having a physical
illness (Gal. 4:13) would have ministered in north Galatia which was known to
be a dry and mountainous region unlike the southern part which was a commercial
centre and easy for access to other places.23 Moreover, Carson, Moo
and Morris say that scholars have also suggested that even Paul’s Jewish
opponents would not have pursued him into the hard northern terrain but rather
to an easy and accessible area in the south which is more plausible.24
Moreover, W. M. Ramsay argues that churches developed along the great lines of
communication which points the
evidence more toward a southern position than a northern Galatia.25

Sixthly,
Carson, Moo and Morris note that the words of welcome that Paul (Gal. 4:14) has
also
been used to suggest that a similar welcome was given to Paul at Lystra (Acts
14:12). But as
argued by Carson, Moo and Morris this connection between Gal. 4:14 and Acts
14:12 is not a

strong enough evidence to sustain a southern position because of
the fact that others argue Paul’s

accompanied
Paul only during his visit to the South Galatians churches and Peter (Gal.
2:7-8)

who according to the
available evidence is never seen in northern Galatia and hence suggests that
both of them could be known only by the Southern Galatians.27 However,
Brown questions that “would not Barnabas’ presence at the famous Jerusalem
meeting have been more widely known and not only to those whom he evangelized?”28

Recipients: North or South?

Carson,
Moo and Morris tells us that scholars such as F.F. Bruce have concluded that
the

Northern
region could be preferred over the southern because the arguments are more

compelling
in this direction.29 On the other hand Dunn says that neither a
northern nor a southern
position can be fully argued and a decisive decision made. However, says Dunn,
the puzzle does
not in any way affect the fact that the recipients included both Jews and
Gentiles. Dunn notes
that a mention in Gal. 4:8 clearly the inclusion of Gentiles in Paul’s address
which places them
among the audience.30

Conclusion

It
is clear from the scholarly opinion that evidences does not help in clearly
determining the

destination
for the letter to Galatians. Thus to pronounce a final verdict on whether the
audience
are north or south Galatians is not possible at this point. While scholars such
as F.F. Bruce have
suggested a northern position based on compelling evidence, as rightly noted by
Dunn, it does
not make any impact on determining the particularity of the audience. For Paul,
the more serious
issue was to address both Jews and Gentiles. Thus to be caught up with the geographic
issue is to
miss the point of Paul’s address to a racial mix of audience which is more
important in this letter.

Tuesday, March 26, 2013

This passage is the final
instructive from Jesus to his disciples. After his resurrection, Jesus’ first
appearance to the two women (Matt. 28:7-9), and he sent two women to tell the
disciples to go to Galilee and to meet him (Matt. 28:10). And our text is his
second appearance to the eleven disciples at Galilee (Matt. 28:16-20). In this
passage the narrator intends to remind his reader (s) to understand Jesus is
more than human (i.e., Jesus is the “Son of God,” and “King”), and his special
purpose for our life.

Homiletical Outlines

1. Obey Jesus because he
alone to be worshipped

Matthew 28:16, the narrator
narrating the story that the eleven disciples (cf. after the death of Judas at
27:5) went up to the mountain of Galilee where Jesus had arranged to meet them.

There are two groups of people
who went to meet Jesus in Galilee: (i) those who worshiped Jesus; and (ii)
those who doubted.

2. Obey Jesus because he has
the supreme authority over all aspects of life

The spheres in which he now
exercises absolute (as the risen Lord) authority are enlarged to include heaven
and earth (i.e., universe). Moreover, this passage echoes Daniel 7:14 says, “To
him was given dominion and glory and kingship, that all peoples, all nations,
and language should serve him….”

3. Obey Jesus’ commands
because his presence and power would among his believers

Jesus links his universal
authority with the command to “go” and “make disciples of all the nations”
through the connecting word “therefore.” Once the disciples are made, it is
essential for them to be baptized in the name of the triune God (Father, Son,
and the Holy Spirit in one Godhead) in order to become incorporated into a
Christian community or signifies incorporation into the fellowship of God. The
activity of “teaching” is also essential part of the discipling process. The
disciples obeyed and imitated the words and actions of the Lord Jesus and then
passed on to others what he taught.

4. Conclusion

Finally, we learnt that the
disciples made Jesus King of their lives and worship him as their Savior, God,
and King….

5. Application

Just like the disciples, with
the same authority, Jesus still commanded us to tell others the Good

Sunday, January 20, 2013

IV. WHY IS IT NECESSARY TO INTRODUCE AND TEACH THE CATECHISM IN THE CHURCH?

Zacharias Ursinus (1534-1583), German Reformed
theologian and principal author of the Heidelberg Catechism, wrote in the
Special Prolegomena section of his Commentary on the Heidelberg Catechism:

This necessity may be urged,

1. Because it is the command of God: “Ye shall
teach them to your children” etc. (Deut. 11. 19.)

2. Because of the divine glory which demands
that God be not only rightly known and worshipped by those of adult age, but
also by children, according as it is. said, “Out of the mouth of babes and
sucklings hast thou ordained strength.” (Ps. 8. 2.)

3. On account of our comfort and salvation; for
without a true knowledge of God and his Son Jesus Christ, no one that has
attained to years of discretion and understanding can be saved, or have any
sure comfort that he is accepted in the sight of God. Hence it is said, “This
is life eternal that they might know thee, the only true God, and Jesus Christ,
whom thou hast sent,” And again, “Without faith it is impossible to please
God.” (John 17. 3, Heb. 11. 6.) And not only so, but no one believes on him of
whom he knows nothing, or has not heard; for, “How shall they believe in him of
whom they have not heard?” “So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the
word of God.” (Rom. 10. 14, 17.) It is necessary, therefore, for all those who
will be saved, to lay hold of, and embrace the doctrine of Christ, which is the
chief and fundamental doctrine of the gospel. But, in order that this may be
done, there must be instructions imparted to this effect and of necessity, some
brief and simple form of doctrine, suited and adapted to the young, and such as
are unlearned.

4. For the preservation of society and the
church. All past history proves that religion and the worship of God, the
exercise and practice of piety, honesty, justice, and truth, are of the
greatest importance to the well-being and perpetuation of the church and of the
commonwealth. But it is in vain that we look for these things among barbarous
nations, since they have never been known to produce the fruits of Piety and
virtue. Hence, there is a necessity that we should be trained to the practice
of these things from our earliest years; because the heart of man is depraved
and evil from his youth; yea, such is the corruption of our nature, that unless
we early commence the work of reformation and moral training, we too late apply
a remedy when, through long delay, the evil principles and inclinations of the
heart have become so strengthened and confirmed, as to bid defiance to the
restraints we may then wish to impose upon them. If we are not correctly
instructed in our childhood out of the sacred Scriptures concerning God and his
will, and do not then commence the practice of piety, it is with great
difficulty, if ever, we are drawn away from these errors which are, as it were,
born in us, or which we have imbibed from, our youth, and that we are led to
abandon the vices in which we have been brought up, and to which we have been
accustomed. If, therefore, the church and state are to be preserved from
degeneracy and final destruction, it is of the utmost importance that this
depravity of our nature should, in due time, be met with proper restraints, and
be subdued.

5. There is a necessity that all persons should
be made acquainted with the rule and standard according to which we are to
judge and decide, in relation to the various opinions and dogmas of men, that
we may not be led into error, and be seduced thereby, according to the
commandment which is given in relation to this subject, “Beware of false
prophets.” “Prove all things.” “Try the spirits whether they are of God.”
(Matt. 7. 15, 1 Thess. 5. 21, 1 John 4. l.) But the law and the Apostle’s
creed, which are the chief parts of the catechism, constitute the rule and
standard according to which we are to judge of the opinions of men, from which
we may see the great importance of a familiar acquaintance with them.

6. Those who have properly studied and learned
the Catechism, are generally better prepared to understand and appreciate the
sermons which they hear from time to time, inasmuch as they can easily refer
and reduce those things which they hear out of the word of God, to the
different heads of the catechism to which they appropriately belong, whilst, on
the other hand, those who have not enjoyed this preparatory training, hear
sermons for the most part, with but little profit to themselves.

7. The importance of catechisation may be urged
in view of its peculiar adaptedness to those learners who are of weak and
uncultivated minds, who require instruction in a short, plain, and perspicuous
manner, as we have it in the catechism, and would not, on account of their
youth and weakness of capacity, be able to understand it, if presented in a
lengthy and more difficult form.

8. It is also necessary, for the purpose of
distinguishing and separating the youths, and such as are unlearned, from
schismatics and profane heathen, which can most effectually be done by a
judicious course of catechetical instruction.

Lastly. A knowledge of the catechism is
especially important for those who are to act as teachers, because they ought
to have a more intimate acquaintance with the doctrine of the church than
others, as well on account of their calling, that they may one day be able to
instruct others, as on account of the many facilities which they have for
obtaining a knowledge of this doctrine, which it becomes them diligently to
improve, that they may, like Timothy, become well acquainted with the Holy
Scriptures, and “be good ministers of Jesus Christ, nourished up in the words
of faith, and of a good doctrine, whereunto they have attained.” (1. Tim. 4,
6.)

Tuesday, January 15, 2013

Although the exact origins of Christianity in India
remain unclear, there is a general scholarly consensus that Christianity was
rooted in India by the 6th century AD. (based on the available documents).

·However,
according to the St.Thomas tradition, Christianity's existence in India can be
traced back to the 1st century

·Christianity
was established in Indian even before some of the European nations became
Christianity.

·Christianity
is India's third largest religion, with approximately 24 million followers,
constitution 2.3 percent (according to the census) of India's population.

·However,
the Census does not take into consideration those who do not explicitly
identify themselves as Christians.

·Christians
are found all across India and in all walks of life, with major populations in
parts of South India, God and North East India.

·Major
urban centers also have sizable Christian presence. (something around 13% of
urban population, 6% in Bangalore, 5% in Chennai).

·Strong
pockets of Christians are also found in south Gujarat,, Punjab, chattisgarh
and Bihar.

Categories of Christians

·Syrian,
Orthodox, Mar Thoma Christians

·Anglo
Indian Christians (first Methodist missionary to India, focused on them, so
there are good number of Anglo Indians are Methodists)

·Christians
from the upper castes background. (William wilberforce played vital role in
1813 rule which allows missionaries to do ministry among Indians)

oFrom 1813-1860 lots of
early converts of these missionaries were upper castes. most of them were
Brahmins and some are Sathyiars.

·Christians
from Dalit background. (1850 onwards, there was significant mission movement
among Dalits)

oThe era of mass movement
began from 1850 onwards.

·Christians
from Tribal background.

oMost missionaries did
not want to go inner part of country. But once mass movement taken place, they
started go inside the country.

·Crypto
Christians with dual identity. (Crypto - those who do not want reveal their
real identity) (they are found in church but not necessarily)

·Secret
followers of Christ. (they are not found in church)

·Anonymous
Christians.

Some more Categories

·Yesu
Bhaktas - (devotees of Christ - mostly they live in Varanasi)

·Yesu
Satsongis - mostly from Punjab, they don’t say that they are not Christians but
they follow the teachings of Christ.

·Yesu
Darbaris - in the court yard of Christ, everyone is welcome, we don’t need to
Christians. It was developed by Narayanverma Thilak in Maharastra.

·Believers
found in house churches - they don’t feel the need of Christians but they
strictly follow the principles of Christ.

·Except
the first five categories, the Cencsus of Indian does not record other
categories of people as Christians

·The
fourth and fifth categories of people largely became Christians through mass
movements.

If we put together all these categories, Indian at
least should have 5-7% of Christians. It approximately 50 million
Christians.